Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Time and time again, the gov't used eccentric organizations as (using Fred's phrase) - "cat's paws" to get entry into an area. Then, if they were shot up, or they successfully executed an incident or even a coup d'etat, the gov't could then move in to impose order. Manchuria was taken over by just this means, and the (relatively) idealistic Ishihara Kanji then sidelined by pragmatists after the Kwantung Army took over Manchuko "on it's own."

The Mukden railway bombing that prompted the Manchurian takeover was done by Kanji Ishiwara (who, not oddly, trained in Germany) and number of other a junior army officers, and he was the one who ordered the seizure of Manchurian cities in response.

This is a consistent pattern. Navy officers and other radicalized service cadet assassinated Prime Minister Inukai in '32 and the Kodoha attempted a putsch in '36. With 300,000 plus blood signatures supporting the murderers at their trial, there is no seeming need for a hidden hand. In all of this, there no hint of need to hide behind civilian agents provocateurs. The banana republic politics of the warring Kodoha and Toseiha factions after 1932 are nothing if not overt in their plays for power, to say nothing of the Sakurakai waiting on the sidelines.

Ueshiba does not seem merely tossed about from shore to shore like a hapless raft in these seas. He was a able sailor who used the winds and current -- which were going elsewhere -- to get where he wanted to go. And when they could take him nowhere safely, he wisely took harbor in Iwama, and told his son to keep the boat from sinking or burning at the dock. And to give yet more proof to the point, in a far less advantageous position he continued the pattern after the war when he (together with his son) leveraged the association with America that Takeshita had begun for both judo and aikido before the War into re-authorization of his training under his son's administration after the War was over.

Ueshiba does not seem merely tossed about from shore to shore like a hapless raft in these seas.

Erick:

Perhaps our apparent disagreement is over nothing more substantive than the use of the word "merely."

I believe we agree that Ueshiba was seeking a liberation of some sort.

Of course, if one is seeking liberation of any kind, of necessity one begins with one's own conditions. The danger, as I see it, is that western students of the way established by Ueshiba (and I hasten to add that what I am about to say has been frequently raised as a critique of a common pattern among western students of some of the more esoteric eastern religio-spiritual traditions with which he engaged) begin by searching for liberation from their own cultural conditions and end with the adoption of an alternative system of bondages that have less to do with the larger forward trajectory of their chosen vehicle than they have to do with the particular constraints their chosen vehicle was designed to leave behind.

In regard to the mismatch between both the comparatively vertical structure of eastern culture and the putatively more horizontal structure of western culture, and in regard to more specific political tendencies and factions that can be observed in the career of the Founder (whether one views them as congruencies on the one hand or as tides, winds, shallows and hazards to be negotiated by a skilled sailor as in your analogy), this seems to me to be an area that necessitates great dangers that can only be safely navigated with the assistance of unflinching willingness to examine both historical and current circumstances as they are, and a commitment to critical thinking regarding both those conditions and the choices one makes within them.

In that respect, I would be very surprised indeed if we didn't both agree that very few things, even though they may partake of this or that, are merely this or that and regret any infelicity of expression that may have created a misimpression to the contrary regarding my views.

Finally, I would be remiss if I didn't again thank Peter Goldsbury for the way in which in he has taken the matter of aikido's history and transmission in hand and pursued just such an approach in this series of articles. The series thus far has been has a major step forward and all of us who have been following it are beneficiaries.

Perhaps our apparent disagreement is over nothing more substantive than the use of the word "merely."

perhaps.

Quote:

Fred Little wrote:

The danger, as I see it, is that western students of the way established by Ueshiba ... begin by searching for liberation from their own cultural conditions and end with the adoption of an alternative system of bondages ... this seems to me to be an area that necessitates great dangers that can only be safely navigated with the assistance of unflinching willingness to examine both historical and current circumstances as they are, and a commitment to critical thinking regarding both those conditions and the choices one makes within them.

No argument. A certain facile wooly-minded spiritualism foolishly thinks one can be trivially freed from one's history and circumstance. That verges into one form of error. The too-willing fatalist assumption that a man is a prisoner (willing or not) of his circumstances is verging into another.

History (the truth we have made) and faith (the truth we would make) are subtle admixtures of fate, chance and choice, wherein God does his work, and invites to do also, at least in my tradition. We cannot understand the truth we would make without understanding the intricate processes that formed the truth that has been made. And all the while it outstrips us as we try to keep up.

Quote:

Fred Little wrote:

Finally, I would be remiss if I didn't again thank Peter Goldsbury for the way in which in he has taken the matter of aikido's history and transmission in hand and pursued just such an approach in this series of articles. The series thus far has been has a major step forward and all of us who have been following it are beneficiaries.

Many thanks likewise, and let not we crabbing commentators slow it down.

The Mongolian episode is written in some detail in Sudanomari Kanshu's bio of Ueshiba. (Rather than a link, go on line to Aikido Journal and buy a membership! $25 for the keys to the most complete library of real sources on aikido anywhere!!!!!). But what is illuminating is that the approach to Deguchi was made by a "committee" which was trying to establish a pretext for further Japanese movement into Asia, and they were quite open about the fact that they felt that Deguchi, being a religioius figure, could, in essence, get away with what they couldn't. (Once there, we read mostly about the small group posing as religious figures to the Mongols, Ueshiba "teaching" jujutsu, and moving along with very large armies in an attempt to take over Mongolia.) To be sure, Deguchi thought he was using "them" as much as they thought they were using him. - - - sorry for the digressions. I don't recognize all the names that approached Deguchi, but among them was "Uchida Sensei" - clearly Uchida Ryohei of the Genyosha - Dark Ocean Society.
Unfortunately, the Sudanomari translation stops at #16 - I just wrote to Stan hoping there is some way that it be continued. Fascinating information.
Best

It is a PhD from Penn State. There is a reference to it in the Further Reading at the end of my column. I am in my office at the moment and do not have it in front of me, so I do not have the date. I plan to discuss it and the other sources in the next installment.

It is a PhD from Penn State. There is a reference to it in the Further Reading at the end of my column. I am in my office at the moment and do not have it in front of me, so I do not have the date. I plan to discuss it and the other sources in the next installment.

Best,

PAG

Ellis,

It was awarded in 1975 by the University of Pennsylvania. The full title is The Socio-political Background of the 1921 and 1935 Oomoto Suppressions in Japan.

Why did you put this here? Japan and America were in a horrific war, which was an extension of a horrific war that Japan had initiated against the countries of Asia. As one person said, "war is more terrible than hell, because in hell, you only find the guilty." But to append this note to this particular thread, you seem to single out America has the guilty or hellish party, something all too fashionable these days.
It is off-topic as well. If you want to start a topic on the inhumanity of war - something Ueshiba was not majorly concerned with in his trips to Manchuria as a guest of the military that was raping the country and it's people, or American tactics in WWII, why not start another thread?